FYI: For those worried about Childress.

[mrhonline]

I took the time to do this because I think it's a legitimate concerns, but I openly admit that I didn't think he was going to be on the team next year EVEN before the trade.

Assuming Childress' new contract starts at $4.36M or greater, he will be BYC. That has all kinds of ramifications, but please trust that even though I've spared you many of them, I've done the work.

First, if Claxton retires, you gain $5.76M in immediate cap space that will go towards keeping the Hawks well under the luxury tax.

If that doesn't happen, I think the plan is to trade Claxton along with Childress in a S&T. My personal opinion is that more than one team will want Childress for the MLE, and the winner will be the one offering the best package for Claxton AND Childress. Claxton's contract will be 2 years, $11M to the lucky winner, but remember that insurance covers at least the highest five player's salaries on all NBA teams. In the case of an injury, Claxton's team will get 80% of that money back. Essentially, taking on Claxton's contract would only cost a team ~$2M in actual monies if they are under the cap. (That's something to remember for the Hawks as well). If he's healthy, you have a decent reserve PG, right?

Long story short, there's a small window where the amounts lineup correctly to squeeze things by the BYC problem, but that number just happens to be ~$6M as a starting salary for Childress. That just happens to be right around where the MLE is projected to be.

So, you send out Claxton and Childress (~$6M starting) and then what? Well, you are allowed to take back as little as 80% of the outgoing salary, which equates to ~$9.30M. Subtract the money you were already paying to Claxton, and you have a net gain of only $3.54M.

Trading Childress in a S&T could add as little as $3.5M in salaries, rid Claxton's roster spot, replace Childress with other role players, and possibly add draft picks.

It's absolutely possible to S&T Childress and stay below the luxury tax.

[Diesel]

Quote:

---

I took the time to do this because I think it's a legitimate concerns, but I openly admit that I didn't think he was going to be on the team next year EVEN before the trade.

Assuming Childress' new contract starts at $4.36M or greater, he will be BYC. That has all kinds of ramifications, but please trust that even though I've spared you many of them, I've done the work.

First, if Claxton retires, you gain $5.76M in immediate cap space that will go towards keeping the Hawks well under the luxury tax.

If that doesn't happen, I think the plan is to trade Claxton along with Childress

in a S&T.

My personal opinion is that more than one team will want Childress for the MLE, and the winner will be the one offering the best package for Claxton AND Childress. Claxton's contract will be 2 years, $11M to the lucky winner, but remember that insurance covers at least the highest five player's salaries on all NBA teams. In the case of an injury, Claxton's team will get 80% of that money back. Essentially, taking on Claxton's contract would only cost a team ~$2M in actual monies if they are under the cap. (That's something to remember for the Hawks as well). If he's healthy, you have a decent reserve PG, right?

Long story short, there's a small window where the amounts lineup correctly to squeeze things by the BYC problem, but that number

just happens to be

~$6M as a starting salary for Childress. That

just happens to be

right around where the MLE is projected to be.

So, you send out Claxton and Childress (~$6M starting) and then what? Well, you are allowed to take back as little as 80% of the outgoing salary, which equates to ~$9.30M. Subtract the money you were already paying to Claxton, and you have a net gain of only $3.54M.

Trading Childress in a S&T could add as little as $3.5M in salaries, rid Claxton's roster spot, replace Childress with other role players, and possibly add draft picks.

It's absolutely possible to S&T Childress and stay below the luxury tax.

I'm not so worried about Chillz. I'm more worried about Smoove (even if Speedy Retires).

I think the truth is that Smoove could be triage... If Bibby comes in a looks good. We have our PF of the future with Al and I must say, Al looks good. That leaves Smoove and Chillz. If Philly comes in an offers us a SNT of Smoove for Dalembert and a first, I think ASG goes for it. Why shouldn't they?? If Philly wants to pressure us, then they offer Smoove a front loaded deal worth 13 million per. Roughly 5 years, 66 million.

Most teams know that we don't have the money to match and a 5 year deal, we might not have the say so to match. Plus, when you talking 13 million plus.. we might not have the desire to match. But if Philly offers Dalembert/1st... then I don't think we could turn them down.

A front line of Dalembert, Horf, and Marv would be strong... Especially with a backcourt of JJ and Bibby or Law.

If it's not Philly, then it could be Memphis. If it's not Memphis, then it could be Chicago. I just think that nows a time when we should try to win... and in the offseason, prolly expect somebody to come strong after Smoove.

[swolehawk2]

Anybody hear how Chills' MRI went?

[TheNorthCydeRises]

A team would have to do what we did with JJ, to get Smoove away from us. The ASG definitely matches any offer for Smoove. It'll be interesting to see if a team even makes an offer for Smoove, because of this.

Daly + 1st does not equal or is greater than Smoove. Smoove is rapidly improving as a player and may be at an all-star level next season.

The trick for Woody, is finding a defensive big on the cheap, that can help us for 15 minutes a night. That big could also enable Horford to play a little PF in stretches.

[NJHAWK]

Some idiot on the PHO Suns espn board is saying Chills is out for the season. I think he is just pizzed cause us getting Bibby will make their pick worse.

[TheDude]

i'm not sure about your affection for Dalembert, Diesel but he and a 1st is sooooooo not worthy of a trade of Josh Smith.

[Diesel]

Quote:

---

i'm not sure about your affection for Dalembert, Diesel but he and a 1st is sooooooo not worthy of a trade of Josh Smith.

We're talking a 2008 first rounder from Philly!

IF we get that pick unprotected, I have to strongly disagree with you homers.

I'm on the Smoove bus and all, but when you look at financial + practical.... it depends on the deal.

[GST]

Diesel, I agree. When we took Horford, some of us here saw that this would be the issue that would have to be dealt with eventually. If we trade Marvin, and move Smoove to the 3, we will be in the same boat we are in now, not enough outside shooting to keep defenses honest.

[Guest Walter]

Quote:

---

First, if Claxton retires, you gain $5.76M in immediate cap space that will go towards keeping the Hawks well under the luxury tax.

---

Not going to happen.

Quote:

---

, I think the plan is to trade Claxton along with Childress

in a S&T.

My personal opinion is that more than one team will want Childress for the MLE, and the winner will be the one offering the best package for Claxton AND Childress. Claxton's contract will be 2 years, $11M to the lucky winner, but remember that insurance covers at least the highest five player's salaries on all NBA teams. In the case of an injury, Claxton's team will get 80% of that money back. Essentially, taking on Claxton's contract would only cost a team ~$2M in actual monies if they are under the cap. (That's something to remember for the Hawks as well). If he's healthy, you have a decent reserve PG, right?

Long story short, there's a small window where the amounts lineup correctly to squeeze things by the BYC problem, but that number

just happens to be

~$6M as a starting salary for Childress. That

just happens to be

right around where the MLE is projected to be.

So, you send out Claxton and Childress (~$6M starting) and then what? Well, you are allowed to take back as little as 80% of the outgoing salary, which equates to ~$9.30M. Subtract the money you were already paying to Claxton, and you have a net gain of only $3.54M.

Trading Childress in a S&T could add as little as $3.5M in salaries, rid Claxton's roster spot, replace Childress with other role players, and possibly add draft picks.

It's absolutely possible to S&T Childress and stay below the luxury tax.

---

Holy [censored] that's funny! All we've got to do is convince a team to not only take on Claxton's contract and further hurt their cap but also give us something in return for him and an expensive JC.

Are you suggesting a team gives us a 1st rd pick or valuable players for Claxton's contract and JC. Oh, and they have to perfectly match our need for saving 20% on contracts. Come on. This is inane.

W

[Admin]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

First, if Claxton retires, you gain $5.76M in immediate cap space that will go towards keeping the Hawks well under the luxury tax.

---

Not going to happen.

Why is that not going to happen?